One People, One State, One Purpose

[Sovereigntist 0]

Greetings everyone, it is with great honor and humility that I reach out to you today and ask for just a moment of your time. As you all know, we are facing the greatest economic crisis in history and it has become evidently clear that our governments do not have even the slightest idea of what to do. Now, there are many things which can be attributed to the present state of affairs, but there is no denying that poor leadership and corruption played a central role in all of it. National leaders need to take immediate action and work together to overcome this crisis, but unfortunately they are neither willing nor capable of doing so. The harsh reality is that global stability is deteriorating at an alarming rate and we are heading towards a complete economic collapse. So what are national leaders around the world doing to prevent this from happening? Unfortunately, our so-called leaders are doing absolutely nothing except blaming one another for a crisis they are all guilty of creating. The fact is that this crisis was deliberately created by them or at the very least made worse by their sheer incompetence. It is no secret that our governments are made up very largely of politicians who are either corrupt or incompetent. The only real mystery is how they have been able to hide their criminal activities from us for so long. But if this crisis has revealed anything about them it is just how quickly they will resort to lying and false accusations in order to cover up their mistakes. And what better way for a politician to evade personal responsibility than by diverting the public’s attention away from themselves? The unfortunate truth is that we have become tolerant of corruption and have forgotten that it is our constitutional right to not only remove criminals from office but, if necessary, create an entirely new government. The Declaration of Independence states “that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.” We need a new government now more than ever which is why I invite you to read Sovereignty for free. Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government. I believe, as do my fellow Sovereigntists, that only by working together will we be able to save true democracy from corruption and ultimately prevent the impending economic collapse. There is still time for us to set things right, but only if we take action here and now. For Sovereignty!

[Infidel Dog 44]

27 minutes ago, Sovereigntist said:

Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government.

No, it's not.

https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Sovereigntism

It has nothing to do with "Global Government." Or at least it didn't used to. 

I'll listen though. Where would your Global Government reside? Who would be at the top? How would you enforce rules?

I won't be wading through the 119 pages at your link to discover you're just another progressive socialist globalist who likes to redefine words.

 

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Infidel Dog, this new government would simply use the existing infrastructure (state buildings) that are already established throughout the world and would build new ones wherever they are necessary or nonexistent.

The person "at the top" would be whoever is fairly voted into office, but they must be at least 18 years of age, graduated from a 4 years' course of political education, and cannot have any criminal convictions.

The rule of law would be enforced just as it is now. However, the justice system would impose lesser sentences on first-time offenders and non-violent crimes, while repeat offenders and violent crimes would receive harsher sentences. More importantly, in order to determine that those in office are actually acting in the interests of the people an independent court system will be created to supervise everything they say and do.

We understand your skepticism, but hope that you will be willing to give Sovereignty a chance by reading it.

Edited May 17 by Sovereigntist

[Rue 1,136]

5 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:

Greetings everyone, it is with great honor and humility that I reach out to you today and ask for just a moment of your time. As you all know, we are facing the greatest economic crisis in history and it has become evidently clear that our governments do not have even the slightest idea of what to do. Now, there are many things which can be attributed to the present state of affairs, but there is no denying that poor leadership and corruption played a central role in all of it. National leaders need to take immediate action and work together to overcome this crisis, but unfortunately they are neither willing nor capable of doing so. The harsh reality is that global stability is deteriorating at an alarming rate and we are heading towards a complete economic collapse. So what are national leaders around the world doing to prevent this from happening? Unfortunately, our so-called leaders are doing absolutely nothing except blaming one another for a crisis they are all guilty of creating. The fact is that this crisis was deliberately created by them or at the very least made worse by their sheer incompetence. It is no secret that our governments are made up very largely of politicians who are either corrupt or incompetent. The only real mystery is how they have been able to hide their criminal activities from us for so long. But if this crisis has revealed anything about them it is just how quickly they will resort to lying and false accusations in order to cover up their mistakes. And what better way for a politician to evade personal responsibility than by diverting the public’s attention away from themselves? The unfortunate truth is that we have become tolerant of corruption and have forgotten that it is our constitutional right to not only remove criminals from office but, if necessary, create an entirely new government. The Declaration of Independence states “that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.” We need a new government now more than ever which is why I invite you to read Sovereignty for free. Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government. I believe, as do my fellow Sovereigntists, that only by working together will we be able to save true democracy from corruption and ultimately prevent the impending economic collapse. There is still time for us to set things right, but only if we take action here and now. For Sovereignty!

Your greeting is a large run on sentence with a plethora of vague references and complaints.

In fact I notice many "new" posters who come on this  board with such pronouncements then quickly vanish.

I also notice the  opening statement does not ask  for or invite comment but makes a unilateral pronouncement.

I also note a reference to one world government that appears to me to be written in a way to incite argumentative responses.

What is your agenda on this forum? What do you intend to promulgate>  Because if that is what you want to do, explain your positions clearly and ask for feedback.

If you simply want to use the forum to yell  at people with one way declarations then your intent is trolling and that will soon become evident and I suppose you will vanish as quick as you came with no responses or of course lead in to another troll continuing a pattern on the board many are aware of us well.

Thank you.

 

 

Edited May 17 by Rue

[Moonlight Graham 360]

1 single global government is the worst idea of all-time.

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Rue, what other agenda can one have on a political forum other than to discuss politics?

My post was not to "incite argumentative responses" but rather to spark one's interest into reading Sovereignty or to leave a comment like yourself.

If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them.

Edited May 17 by Sovereigntist

[Infidel Dog 44]

I'll discuss it with you.

So you're going to have your one world government and your fearless leader will be voted in by popular vote, you say. And anybody who doesn't like it can deal with this army and police force you say you want. So do you get this military first? Because you're going to need it to take over.

Remember you're not just proclaiming this global sovereignty. You'll need to dissolve all other nations sovereignty. Then there's the Muslim world. How were you planning on taking what they'll see as Allah's sovereignty. You're talking something like Israel but on a massive scale. Mohammed wouldn't like that.

Not to mention the Chinese. I see why you globalist types want to take the Americans guns though. 

The Chinese and the Americans vote for a leader to be decided by popular vote. Who wins?

I don't know. Rots o ruck, I guess.

Edited May 17 by Infidel Dog

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Infidel Dog, there was never any mention of an army or police force. You misread the question being answered.

No one can just proclaim global Sovereignty as it can only be achieved after every nation has been dissolved. Nations can only begin to dissolve from within once their citizens realize that nationalism is nothing more than a fabrication to keep them fighting one another.

We are already living in a "globalist" world and have been for some time now. To quote Martin Luther King, we have "inherited a great world house in which we have to live together, because we can never again live apart and must learn to live with each other in peace." There have been many different empires throughout history in which different religious groups lived peacefully together--if it was possible back then, it is definitely still possible today.

Also, We Sovereigntists believe in gun ownership. 

 

Edited May 17 by Sovereigntist

[Rue 1,136]

14 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:

To Rue, what other agenda can one have on a political forum other than to discuss politics?

My post was not to "incite argumentative responses" but rather to spark one's interest into reading Sovereignty or to leave a comment like yourself.

If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them.

Thank you for the polite answer and willingness to respond candidly..much  appreciated.

One question I have is, given the failure of the UN model what makes you think you can run a one world government free of political compromise that prevents meaningful government?

[Infidel Dog 44]

13 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:

To Infidel Dog, there was never any mention of an army or police force. You misread the question being answered.

I asked, "How would you enforce rules?"  You replied "with existing infrastructure." If my assumption that you meant police and military was incorrect,very well,, how do you plan to keep the unruly sections of the global populace in line without police and military then.

You replied something about keeping state buildings. Surely you can't be serious if you're thinking that would be enough.

You seem to be telling us that there will be no need for coercion. So people will simply give up their sovereignty  of nations and beliefs for your global sovereignty out of respect for what you believe is the strength of your superior idea, is that it?

Not going to happen.

You tell us people are already moving towards larger global rule and for a while that may have been true. Today the United Nations is a joke. The EU is one more leaving country away from being a shambles and NAFTA is gonzo. Incrementalism only works until you reach the line nobody will cross and you globalists are pretty much there.

As to this idea "Sovereigntists" will let us keep our guns, I have to ask - what's the difference between a Sovereigntist and a Globalist? Because globalists are gun-grabbers. If you tell me Sovereigntists are not I have to call shenanigans.

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Rue, the failure of the UN can be attributed to the very thing which brought about the collapse of the League of Nations, that is, the nationalist fabrication. As long as nationalism continues to exist, then there will never be peace between nations. In order to secure a meaningful government, you must first secure honest politicians. And that is exactly what Sovereignty is hoping to shed light on.

[Michael Hardner 593]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

 

One question I have is, given the failure of the UN model what makes you think you can run a one world government free of political compromise that prevents meaningful government?

Parallel question, as a teasing jibe:

Given the failure of Canada as a confederation what makes you think any organization other than scavenger-based anarchy can run a country free of people and Albertans demanding 'rights' ?!?

[Infidel Dog 44]

18 minutes ago, Sovereigntist said:

To Rue, the failure of the UN can be attributed to the very thing which brought about the collapse of the League of Nations, that is, the nationalist fabrication. As long as nationalism continues to exist, then there will never be peace between nations. In order to secure a meaningful government, you must first secure honest politicians. And that is exactly what Sovereignty is hoping to shed light on.

And that's how you're going to save the world, are you? By 'shedding light' through 'honest politicians.'

Pray tell, O' mystic overmind, how do you plan on doing that? Where will you be finding these 'honest politicians?'  Will you be volunteering or do you have them hidden away somewhere you can't tell us about right now? What is this "light"  you plan on honouring us with? I hope it's something better than this cryptic drek you've been bilging out so far. 

I like my national pride and I'm not alone. If you want to take it you're going to need something more than "light." Especially when your light sounds kind of dark. And you're going to do it without police or military, are you? And you think it's a good idea we who won't give up our country, should have guns, do you? Why don't I believe you?

[Infidel Dog 44]

You have as much hope of perpetrating this farce on the world as you do of getting anybody who's not nuts reading that 119 pages of gobbledy gook. 

And stop calling your globalism sovereigntism. It's contrived, and silly sounding.

Edited May 17 by Infidel Dog

[Michael Hardner 593]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

 

.. stop calling your globalism sovereigntism. It's contrived, and silly sounding.

'Globalism' is itself a contrived term.  If I ask something to define it, I inevitably am able to find something that they SUPPORT that is Globalist.  When I point that out, the thread dies, or the troll finds other feeding grounds, or comes back with a new handle.

It's a boogeyman term, used by alt-newbies to regurgitate alt-speak...

[Infidel Dog 44]

Honestly...not a big fan of globalism either. 

But I get your point. Although, doesn't it seem like the term "Globalism" isn't working so they thought they'd add the the T to 'sovereignism' then redefine it to mean globalism and in theory make it sound special?

Edited May 17 by Infidel Dog

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Infidel Dog, Sovereignty has no intention of forcing or coercing anyone into doing anything, but rather it allows the reader to come to their own conclusion. It is simply pointing out the fatal flaw with today's governments and provides a solution to fixing them.

And to answer your question, you cannot just "find" honest politicians, they must prove their honesty through their actions. But how can we prove that they are really being honest? By making sure that every political act they carry out is done openly. In other words, we have to eliminate government secrecy if we are to secure honest politicians. 

Edited May 17 by Sovereigntist

[Army Guy 766]

2 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:

To Infidel Dog, Sovereignty has no intention of forcing or coercing anyone into doing anything, but rather it allows the reader to come to their own conclusion. It is simply pointing out the fatal flaw with today's governments and provides a solution to fixing them.

And to answer your question, you cannot just "find" honest politicians, they must prove their honesty through their actions. But how can we prove that they are really being honest? By making sure that every political act they carry out is done openly. In other words, we have to eliminate government secrecy if we are to secure honest politicians. 

So we all are just going to sit around the camp fire drink beer and smoke a few joints, singing kumbaya, with one common set of laws and rules for everyone on the planet....

the fatal flaw in your plan is the honest politician ...name one world leader who has been totally honest with their people and has been totally open ?  

And how does 4 years of studying political education prepare one person that is 19 years of age to be the leader for every race, creed, religion, not to mention the different types of governments, or dictatorships....on this planet, I mean more than 1/2 the current world leaders we have today do not have those qualifications to lead. pass me that bowl will ya...

[Sovereigntist 0]

To Army Guy, you are absolutely correct in saying that no leader has ever been totally honest with the public and they never will be--not unless the system changes. 

Although I address the issue of responsibility throughout Sovereignty, please refer to the chapter called "Process of Election" for a brief summary on how we can secure honest politicians. The answer is the is actually quite simple but requires a collective response to be effective.

You are also correct in saying that more than half of the current world leaders lack the proper education (and even intelligence for that matter) to be in office. I address their lack of political knowledge in more detail in the chapter called "True Democratic System." 

I understand that by referring to the book I am not exactly answering your questions, but the answers I would tell you on here would be simply copied and pasted from it.

[Rue 1,136]

With utmost respect Sovereignty your concepts already exist with Hari Krishna or the Church of Scientology.

I myself do not wish to  live within an insectoid hive.

I myself am more inclined to emulate the Denobulans not Borg if I have to choose an alien approach. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 18 by Rue

[Infidel Dog 44]

7 hours ago, Sovereigntist said:

To Infidel Dog, Sovereignty has no intention of forcing or coercing anyone into doing anything, but rather it allows the reader to come to their own conclusion. It is simply pointing out the fatal flaw with today's governments and provides a solution to fixing them.

Yeah, I heard all that - 'come to the light, honest politicians,' and so on. Meaningless drivel.

Globalism is a scam.

Edited May 18 by Infidel Dog

[Zeitgeist 501]

Since there’s such skepticism about the effectiveness and even the general intent of global organizations apart from in a narrow band of clear consensus, I think most new global initiatives will be driven by nations forming coalitions or trading blocks that provide privilege of membership in exchange for adherence to agreed upon principles.  The most effective coalitions will be the ones with the most compelling values, for example, in terms of fair trade, human rights, labour standards, and environmental protection.

Everyone wants to be in the best league, but leagues have standards of practice.  If you want to play in the big leagues, you’ll have to adhere to a code of ethics.  The benefits are living in a more ethical society.  However. peoples from existing political jurisdictions will have to choose to enter into such partnerships.  There’s no need to replace existing governments that are freely elected. Democracy is one of the cornerstones of any great social organization.  

[Michael Hardner 593]

6 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Yeah, I heard all that - 'come to the light, honest politicians,' and so on. Meaningless drivel.

Globalism is a scam.

But it's not defined.  Is it?

[bcsapper 1,289]

glob·al·ism

/ˈɡlōbəlizəm/

 

noun

noun: globalism

1. the operation or planning of economic and foreign policy on a global basis.

    

   Why is there a problem with definition?

Edited May 18 by bcsapper

[Infidel Dog 44]

My problem with the definition is sometimes people seem to be talking about different things when they mention it.

Sometimes they're just talking global economy and sometimes they use it to mean global rule and the faceless cabal that wants to rule it.

A lot of words have multiple definitions but this one seems so fresh that the lines aren't clearly drawn.

Edited May 18 by Infidel Dog